RECAPITULATION: THE QUESTIONABLE DICHOTOMY BETWEEN “GOOD” AND “BAD” CHOLESTEROL
“The protruding war against Statins”, and we ought to begin with some context and recapitulation. You’d recall that we have previously discussed the questionable dichotomy between bad and good cholesterol. Well, part of how big pharma moved the goalpost on cholesterol, in order to create a market for Statins, is that there was a questionable dichotomy created between good and bad cholesterol. More specifically, cholesterol is generally described as a waxy substance essential for building cell membranes and producing hormones. Cholesterol travels through the bloodstream in particles called lipoproteins, primarily as low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL). LDL, often called “bad cholesterol,” carries cholesterol to cells and arteries, where it can form plaques, narrowing the arteries and increasing the risk of heart attack and stroke. For decades, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol has been commonly referred to as “bad cholesterol” due to its association with increased risks of cardiovascular diseases (CVD), such as heart attacks and strokes. Conversely, high-density lipoprotein (or HDL), known as “good cholesterol,” transports cholesterol from the arteries to the liver for elimination.
DEVELOPING: THE RECENT BLOWS TO THE STATINS SCAM
Well, in an interesting development: an article was published on the 25th of June detailing that Heart disease has been the leading cause of death in the United States for more than a century, but overall heart disease deaths fell 66% between 1970 and 2022, and this was according to an analysis of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data published also in the month of June. So, that drop was spurned by a nearly 90% decline in heart attack fatalities during that time.
Now, on the one hand, heart disease has been the leading cause of death in the United States for more than a century, but overall heart disease deaths fell 66% between 1970 and 2022. That drop was spurned by a nearly 90% decline in heart attack fatalities during that time. On the other hand, heart disease has been the leading cause of death in the United States for more than a century, but overall heart disease deaths fell 66% between 1970 and 2022, according to an analysis of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data published Wednesday. That drop was spurned by a nearly 90% decline in heart attack fatalities during that time.
It’s important to recognise that these changes take place against the backdrop of a high consumption of statins. In fact, in the article referenced, it states that (quote) “Improved cardiac imaging, the invention of coronary artery bypass grafting, the advent of cholesterol-lowering statins and other medical advances contributed to the decrease in heart disease deaths.” Well, contrary to the intentions of the author of the article in question, the findings reported by the CDC and in the article led many to question what would be behind the decrease in heart attacks, and a parallel increase in heart disease.
THE LINK BETWEEN STATINS, CHOLESTEROL, & HEART DISEASE
First, the status quo reports that the cholesterol myth is crumbling, as many people discover that the “go-to” drugs for cholesterol are linked to over 350 adverse
effects, including declining brain function (including dementia). But, the discussion of Statins is not just about side effects – rather, it is about a profound set of underreported health risks. In fact, a database of 561 studies reveals the alarming truth about statins: they harm the body and mind. For instance, a study discovered that Statins, while they are widely used for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia and coronary heart disease and for the prevention of stroke, they have actually resulted in various adverse effects, most commonly affecting muscle and ranging from myalgia to rhabdo-myolysis. These adverse effects are said to be due to a coenzyme Q(10) deficiency because inhibition of cholesterol biosynthesis also inhibits the synthesis of CoQ(10).
In addition, Statins, which are one of history’s most commonly prescribed drugs, have shaped Western society’s approach to treating heart disease. Akira Endo, a Japanese-born biochemist, is said to have discovered statins from mould. His research garnered the attention of pharmaceutical companies, aiming to find a compound that could effectively lower cholesterol—the assumed cause of heart disease. Merck (the pharmaceutical company) ultimately obtained samples of the drug and was “astonished at the potency,” Mr. Endo said in his review, spurring the pharmaceutical company to develop its own statin. Then, in 1987, the FDA approved Merck’s lovastatin, the first commercial statin. But, when you look at the history of statins before big pharma moved the goalpost on what was considered bad cholesterol, you realise that the scientific theory behind statins and even the subsequent studies pointed to significant harm.
Well, for decades, statins have been heralded as reliable heroes in the battle against heart disease, which was said to be the leading cause of death globally. However, a new expert review suggests that long-term use of statins may ACTUALLY be aiding the enemy by accelerating coronary artery calcification instead of providing protection. The review, published in Clinical Pharmacology, suggests that statins may act as “mitochondrial toxins,” impairing muscle function in the heart and blood vessels by depleting coenzyme Q10, which (as we’ve established) is an antioxidant that cells use for growth and maintenance. Multiple studies show that statins inhibit CoQ10 synthesis, leading many patients to supplement. Meanwhile, CoQ10 is vital for producing what is known as ATP, which is the cell’s fundamental energy carrier. Insufficient CoQ10 inhibits ATP production, resulting in an energy deficit that the review authors say “could be a major cause for heart muscle and coronary artery damage.”
Therefore, the crucial question that then arises is: “Who’s behind the studies proving statins’ alleged benefits then? Well, it appears that “virtually all of the major clinical trials of statins were funded by the manufacturers—when the drugs were still on patent”! More specifically, in a 2015 investigative meta-analysis published in The Journal of American Cardiology, researchers reviewed all phase 2 and 3 clinical trials in a decade. They found that nearly 80 percent of the trials had a conflict of interest, and almost 60 percent involved more than half of the authors. Of these studies, 54 had favourable outcomes, and only 12 had unfavourable results.
So, as far as statins are concerned, the manufacturers fabricated the data! The financial ties allowed the manufacturers to design the studies and select patients most likely to benefit from and not be harmed by statin therapy. These ties also allowed the manufacturers to not compare the benefit of statin therapy to the benefit of adopting healthy lifestyle habits and to not ask prospectively about side effects. This truly exposes the deceptive works of pharmakeia (the pharmaceutical industry) shown to us in Revelation 18:23!
DR LEONARD COLDWELL: “STATINS ARE MASS MURDER”
But, the ramifications of taking Statins do not stop there. Dr Leonard Coldwell stated in an interview that Statins are actually “mass murder and always lead to the hardening of the liver.”, while also severely harming the functionality of your brain.
STATINS MARKETING, AND THE NUMBERS GAME IN THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY
So, considering all of these issues, what has propped up Statins as a hero, when there is an abundance of evidence that proves they are anything but a hero? Well, one of the consistent patterns I’ve observed within medicine is that once a drug is identified that can “beneficially” change a number, medical practice guidelines will gradually shift to prioritizing treating that number and before long, rationals will be created that require more and more of the population to be subject to that regimen. In the case of statins, prior to their discovery, it was difficult to reliably lower cholesterol, but once they hit the market, research rapidly emerged stating that cholesterol was more and more dangerous and, hence that more and more people needed to be on statins.
As you would expect, similar increases also occurred within the USA. For example, in 2008-2009, 12% of Americans over 40 reported taking a statin, whereas in 2018-2019, that had increased to 35% of Americans. Given how much these drugs are used, it then raises a simple question—how much benefit do they produce?
As it turns out, this is a remarkably difficult question to answer as the published studies use a variety of confusing metrics to obfuscate their data (which means that the published statin trials almost certainly inflate the benefits of statin therapy), and more importantly, virtually all of the data on statin therapy is kept by a private research collaboration which consistently publishes glowing reviews of statins (and attacks anyone who claims otherwise) but simultaneously refuses to release their data to outside researchers, which has led to those researchers attempting to get this missing data from the drug regulators.
Nonetheless, when independent researchers looked at the published trials (which almost certainly inflated the benefit of statin therapy) they found that taking a statin daily for approximately 5 years resulted in you living, on average, 3-4 days longer. Sadder still, large trials have found this minuscule “benefit” is only seen in men. In short, most of the benefit from statins is from creative ways to rearrange data and causes of death, not any actual benefit.
Here’s what proves that this playing around with numbers is possibly an industry wide issue. What we just discussed is notably very similar to Pfizer’s COVID vaccine trial which professed to be “95% effective” against COVID-19, but in reality only created a 0.8% reduction in minor symptoms of COVID (e.g., a sore throat) and a 0.037% reduction in severe symptoms of COVID (with “severe” never being defined by Pfizer). This in turn meant that you needed to vaccinate 119 people to prevent a minor (inconsequential) case of COVID-19, and 2711 to prevent a “severe” case of COVID-19.
Furthermore, a clinical trial whistleblower later revealed that these figures were greatly inflated as many individuals in the vaccine group who developed COVID-19 like symptoms were never tested for COVID-19. Likewise, these benefits were fleeting as it was shown the “efficacy” of vaccines rapidly waned (disappearing a few months after vaccination). Worse still at six months of follow-up in both Pfizer’s and Moderna’s trials, more vaccinated than unvaccinated individuals died, and similarly a peer-reviewed reanalysis of Pfizer and Moderna’s trial data showed that one was more likely to suffer a severe adverse event from the vaccine than a hospitalization from COVID-19.
FOLLOWING THE MONEY: REGULATORS WERE PUT ON THE STATIN PAYROLL
In circumstances like these where an unsafe and ineffective but highly lucrative drug must be sold, the next step is typically to pay everyone off to promote it. For example, to quote Chapter 7 of Doctoring Data:
“The National Cholesterol Education Programme (NCEP) has been tasked by the National Institutes of Health to develop guidelines [everyone uses] for treating cholesterol levels. Excluding the chair (who was by law prohibited from having financial conflicts of interest), the other 8 members on average were on the payroll of 6 Statin manufacturers.
In 2004, NCEP reviewed 5 large statin trials and recommended: “Aggressive LDL lowering for high-risk patients [primary prevention] with lifestyle changes and statins.”
In 2005 a Canadian division of the Cochrane Collaboration [who were not paid off] reviewed 5 large statin trials (3 were the same as NCEP’s, while the other 2 had also reached a positive conclusion for statin therapy). That assessment instead concluded: “Statins have not been shown to provide an overall health benefit in primary prevention trials.”
Likewise, the American College of Cardiology made a calculator to determine your risk of developing a heart attack or stroke in the next ten years based on your age, blood pressure, cholesterol level, and smoking status. In turn, many doctors punched their patient’s numbers into it and then informed them that they were at high risk of a stroke or heart attack and urgently needed to start a statin. Given that almost everyone ended up being “high risk”, in 2016, Kaiser completed an extensive study which determined this calculator overestimated the rate of these events by 600%! AND YET…sadly, that has not at all deterred the use of this calculator (e.g., medical students are still tested on it for their board examinations). But, here is more about the financial incentives behind the push of statins and the cholesterol lie, from Dr.
Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso
